BNSS Section 330: No formal proof of certain documents (formerly CrPC 294)
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 · in force from 1 July 2024
BNSS 330: No formal proof of certain documents
From 1 July 2024
(1) Where any document is filed before any Court by the prosecution or the accused, the particulars of every such document shall be included in a list and the prosecution or the accused or the advocate for the prosecution or the accused, if any, shall be called upon to admit or deny the genuineness of each such document soon after supply of such documents and in no case later than thirty days after such supply:
Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, relax the time limit with reasons to be recorded in writing:
Provided further that no expert shall be called to appear before the Court unless the report of such expert is disputed by any of the parties to the trial.
(2) The list of documents shall be in such form as the State Government may, by rules, provide.
(3) Where the genuineness of any document is not disputed, such document may be read in evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Sanhita without proof of the signature of the person by whom it purports to be signed:
Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require such signature to be proved.
What it replaced in the CrPC
BNSS 330 ← CrPC 294 · No formal proof of certain documentsChanged
BPR&D's comparison records a change. Read what changed before relying on the old wording.
What changed, per BPR&D: Two new provisos are added. Time limit of thirty days for acceptance or denial of the genuineness of the document, provided the Court may relax the time limit as stated in the first proviso. And the second proviso states that experts should be called only if he is disputed by any parties during the trial. The words “may be prescribed by the State Government” is replaced by “the State Government may, by rules, provide”
Printed in both official correspondence tables (BPR&D and NCRB).
(1)Where any document is filed before any Court by the prosecution or the accused, the particulars of every such document shall be included in a list and the prosecution or the accused, as the case may be, or the pleader for the prosecution or the accused, if any, shall be called upon to admit or deny the genuineness of each such document.
(2) The list of documents shall be in such form as be prescribed by the State Government.
(3) Where the genuineness of any document is not disputed, such document may be read in evidence in inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code without proof of the signature of the person to whom it purports to be signed:
Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require such signature to be proved.
Which one applies
Procedure follows the proceeding. Under section 531(2)(a) of the BNSS, an appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation already pending on 1 July 2024 continues under the CrPC; one begun on or after that date proceeds under the BNSS.
Read BNSS section 531 →Judgments decided under CrPC 294
They remain the law on CrPC 294. Where the provision changed in the move, read what changed before relying on one for an offence after 1 July 2024.
Sources
- Correspondence Table and Comparison Summary of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Bureau of Police Research & Development, Ministry of Home Affairs, page 25.
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: bare Act with Corresponding Section Table, National Crime Records Bureau (Sankalan), page 36.
- The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974), as amended, India Code, Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice.
BPR&D is the Bureau of Police Research & Development (Ministry of Home Affairs); NCRB the National Crime Records Bureau. Their correspondence tables are training aids, not law. This page is general information, not legal advice on any case; the bare Acts as published by the Government of India are the authority.